1996年間，臺灣制定《洗錢防制法》，2007年間，中國大陸制定《反洗錢法》，此時國際環境興起打擊恐怖主義活動、跨境犯罪等，以及國際反洗錢組織FATF、APG等亦針對洗錢內容大幅修訂，並逐年影響中國與臺灣的修法走向。由於兩岸關係的變動同時牽引兩岸法制的互動，2008年政黨輪替馬英九總統上任以後，兩岸關係逐漸改善，民間及官方各項交流也逐年增加，直到2011年10月間，馬總統任內推動7次江陳會及多項議題的簽署，尤其第3次江陳會簽署《海峽兩岸共同打擊犯罪及司法互助協議》，使得兩岸刑事司法互助之共同打擊犯罪政策能即刻啟動，其中兩岸司法互助協議所簽署內容中，有特別提列合作打擊「洗錢」犯罪，這項攸關兩岸共同打擊犯罪功效之合作事項，將有助釐清雙邊執法單位的角色，加強抑制跨境犯罪的猖獗，以及減少不法利得流竄兩岸藏匿的可能，因此本論文研究要旨，亟欲比較兩岸在防制洗錢之法制面、執行面等不同處，側重兩岸執行機構如何有效擱置敏感爭議，全力合作進行防止洗錢活動，並建構適合兩岸司法機關之合作平臺與對口。 本論文的內容，主要分為6章，第1章為緒論，說明本論文研究動機、目的、架構與研究限制等，並有相關名詞與概念的介紹。第2章為比較兩岸洗錢法規的沿革與意涵。第3章是從執法單位的作法切入，比較出兩者之差異性。第4章則分述國際、兩岸洗錢犯罪的發展趨勢，從個案解讀洗錢犯罪的實務態樣。第5章是以兩岸司法互助協議內容為基礎，探究兩岸合作管道與互助模式之建構。第6章為結論，綜整前述5章內容比較，做出研究心得與建議，企盼能提供兩岸有關單位擬定兩岸刑事偵查作為之參考。 兩岸關係難脫離全球化的範疇，相對從國際政治的角度看詭譎多變兩岸關係，仍存有不同的解讀空間。然洗錢犯罪的特性又存在跨境、跨區的特性，因此，兩岸洗錢犯罪的模式自然基於兩岸執法單位漠視及司法管轄空窗期等利多因素，能尋得最為隱密、風險最低的方式進行，故兩岸執法單位合作打擊犯罪已勢在必行，且要根除犯罪的源頭，必得清除犯罪分子的不法利益。有鑑於，洗錢犯罪是諸多重大犯罪後段犯罪行為，犯罪分子獲取不法利益之目的，是盡可能隱匿犯罪所得，故儘管兩岸在共同打擊犯罪上有所斬獲，後續執法單位於追蹤黑錢的最終落腳點時，最後仍會遭遇兩岸法規、政策及執行等層面的阻礙，削弱雙邊偵查能量。洗錢犯罪與執法成效是相對的，單邊弱化，另一側即茁壯，相信當兩岸密切交流後，帶動人力、物資及資金大幅流動時，兩岸洗錢犯罪的數量也必然遽增，為解決兩岸犯罪問題，且同時追查洗錢資金流向，兩岸執法機關必須得建構一套合於兩岸發展之合作模式。准此，為避免主權爭議的框架下，若兩岸權責單位擇取全球治理的概念，支派或培養第三部門並適時賦予官方性質，以避開雙方主權的敏感性，且當雙方皆默許互派半官方代表時，談論的議題可塑性高、代表性大，從合作的立場，再由個案的累積，一旦破案及偵查成效持續開花結果時，相信能為兩岸專責打擊洗錢單位墊定厚實的合作平臺，對於未來開展其他議題的合作，也能起帶頭之效。Taiwanese government drew up “Money Laundering Control Act” in 1996 while Chinese government drew up “Anti-Money Laundering Law” in 2007.During that time, international society decided to suppress the terrorism, transnational crime, while the Financial Action Task Force (FATF)、APG modify the content of money laundering, resulting a gradual effect over the law-making direction in China and Taiwan. Changes in cross-strait relations affect the interaction of law in cross-strait.After President Ma took office in 2008, the cross-strait relation improve gradually, and private, official interflow increase gradually as well. Until October in 2011, President Ma pulled forward seven Chen-Chiang summits and sign several agreements. As a result of the third Chen-Chiang summit, “Agreement on Joint Cross-Strait Crime-fighting and Mutual Judicial Assistance”, make it possible to activate mutual judicial assistance. This cooperation will help the law enforcement agency in both sides, decrease the cross-border crime rate and the possibility of illegal income flow.

The importance of this thesis is to compare the cross-strait differences of law and practice, emphasize how both sides cooperate and ignore the dispute in order to prevent money-laundering, and establish a window to cooperate between cross-strait.

There will be six chapters in this thesis: chapter one is the introduction that explains the motivation, purpose, structure and limitations of this study,alone with introduction about related terms and concepts.

Chapter two is to compare the history of money laundering regulations between two sides of the strait. Chapter three will set out from the angle of the cross-strait law enforcement sectors and find the differences between the two. Chapter four will describe the trend of the international or cross-strait money laundering development and understand the true nature of money laundering through thorough examination of specific cases. Chapter five will explore the construction of cross-strait cooperation channels and mode through the contents of “Agreement on Joint Cross-Strait Crime-fighting and Mutual Judicial Assistance”. Chapter six is the conclusion, which sums up five previous chapters and presents the outcome and suggestion of this study, hoping that it will help organizations concerned at both sides while formulating criminal investigations. Cross-strait relation is part of globalization, and it remains uncertain and leaves room for arguing. Since money laundering can transcend the imitation of distance, it is not surprised that criminals take advantage of the difficulties existed between law enforcements of both sides. Therefore, cooperation between cross-strait is imperative. Although great progress is done regarding fighting the crime, but when the law enforcement start to track down the final destination of the money, there’s still some obstacles existed in regulation, policy and execution. The intensity of law enforcement and money laundering are opposite: the weakening of the other means the strengthening of another. In order to diminish the crime rate and track down the money flow, law enforcement of both sides must build a suitable cooperation mode that corresponds to the development of cross-strait relations. To avoid the dispute over the sovereignty, if the organizations concerned on both sides could accept the concept of global governance, collectively foster an additional sector and allow them for official status, exchange semi-official representatives, after discussing meaningful issues, the outcome will be overwhelmingly successful, and will provide a solid platform for cooperation, while serving as a positive example for cooperation of other areas.